Keith Dysart wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote:
Keith Dysart wrote:
Have you computed the correct result then?
Yes, the results are identical with or without
the 1WL of 75 ohm lossless line, exactly as the
theory predicts it should be.

This is clearly not correct. Without the 75 Ohm line the first
reflection does not arrive back at the generator for 62 cycles.
With the 75 Ohm line, the first reflection arrives back at the
generator after only two cycles. The response is not at all
the same, though I agree, they do arrive at the same steady
state condition.

I am only talking about steady-state so the conditions are
indeed identical, as I stated.

So the two experiments are clearly different.

No, technical theory says they have to be the same in the
steady-state condition. Saying they are different violates
the laws of physics.

Yes, but it is discussing, as its title clearly states, "Additional
Experimental Evidence Proving Existence of Conjugate Match and
Non-Dissipative Source Resistance In RF Power Amplifiers".
I find it not applicable to the experiment at hand since we
are neither discussing a reasonable implementation of an
RF Power Amplifier nor is there a conjugate match.

That you find it "not applicable" is part of your problem.
You ignore reality in favor of your wet dreams. That's your
choice but please don't try to convince the rest of the
world to join you. The impedance seen by the reflections is
NOT the 450 ohm resistor. The impedance seen by the reflections
is the V/I ratio of the source.

Regardless, the real question is can you compute the magnitude
of the re-reflection when it reaches the load and what is the
methodology? (And please do not modify the experiment to do so.)

I have asked you before - please provide me a math model of the
source and I will be more than glad to do so. Hint: Handwaving
the existence of a source is not acceptable. Where's the beef?
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com